Book 5 / Chapter 6
Paragraph 2 - Political Justice and the Role of the Magistrate
Explanation - Part By Part
"Now we have previously stated how the reciprocal is related to the just; but we must not forget that what we are looking for is not only what is just without qualification but also political justice."
Aristotle here is reminding us that justice is a broad concept, and while it’s important to understand justice in general or in a universal sense, the main focus here is specifically political justice. This means justice dealing with people living together in a community or society that’s organized politically—governed by laws, and structured in a way to allow for mutual cooperation toward self-sufficiency. Political justice is a subset of justice that is concerned with how fairness and equality are maintained in the governance and interactions of citizens.
"This is found among men who share their life with a view to selfsufficiency, men who are free and either proportionately or arithmetically equal, so that between those who do not fulfil this condition there is no political justice but justice in a special sense and by analogy."
Aristotle is saying that true political justice can only exist among people who live together in a society aiming for self-sufficiency—a community that supports itself and works together to meet everyone's needs. These people must also be free (not slaves or under the control of others) and either proportionately equal (meaning fairness is based on their contributions or merits) or arithmetically equal (everyone is treated the same, no matter their contributions). If people don’t meet these criteria—if they aren’t free, self-sufficient, or on some footing of equality—then what might appear to be "justice" between them is not truly political justice, but something close to it, a sort of analogy or partial version. In other words, full political justice requires a specific type of social and relational structure.
"For justice exists only between men whose mutual relations are governed by law; and law exists for men between whom there is injustice; for legal justice is the discrimination of the just and the unjust."
This part explains that justice can only exist among people who are connected by a system of laws. In other words, for justice to have meaning, there must be some sort of legal or societal framework that governs interactions between individuals. Laws are necessary because they help define what is "just" (fair and right) and what is "unjust" (unfair or wrong). Without laws or rules, there would be no clear way to determine what is fair or unfair in people's actions toward one another. Therefore, justice relies on a shared structure of laws to differentiate between fair and unfair behavior.
"And between men between whom there is injustice there is also unjust action (though there is not injustice between all between whom there is unjust action), and this is assigning too much to oneself of things good in themselves and too little of things evil in themselves."
Aristotle is making a distinction here about injustice and unjust actions. He explains that whenever there is injustice between individuals, there will naturally be unjust actions committed as a result. However, not every instance of unjust action necessarily means that there is a deeper state of "injustice" between the people involved. In other words, unjust actions can occur without there being a relationship or context of injustice between the parties.
For example, someone might commit an unfair or selfish act (an unjust action) in a moment of passion or ignorance, but this doesn't necessarily mean there's an entrenched or ongoing state of injustice between them and others—like a deliberate imbalance in how they treat each other. True injustice reflects a more significant and deliberate problem, where someone consistently assigns themselves too much of the good things (e.g., wealth, power, or pleasure) and too little of the bad things (e.g., responsibility, effort, or burden), creating an unfair imbalance in the relationship or system. This idea of "taking more than your fair share" and avoiding burdens is at the heart of what Aristotle means by injustice.
"This is why we do not allow a man to rule, but rational principle, because a man behaves thus in his own interests and becomes a tyrant."
Aristotle is making the argument that humans, when given unchecked power, often act in their own self-interest rather than for the common good. This tendency can lead them to become tyrants—rulers who exploit others to benefit themselves. For this reason, society should prioritize ruling based on rational principles (like laws, fairness, and justice) rather than placing too much power in the hands of any one individual. The point is that principles and laws can act as impartial guides for what is just, whereas humans are more likely to be influenced by personal desires and biases.
"The magistrate on the other hand is the guardian of justice, and, if of justice, then of equality also. And since he is assumed to have no more than his share, if he is just (for he does not assign to himself more of what is good in itself, unless such a share is proportional to his merits-so that it is for others that he labours, and it is for this reason that men, as we stated previously, say that justice is 'another's good'), therefore a reward must be given him, and this is honour and privilege; but those for whom such things are not enough become tyrants."
Aristotle is explaining the role of a just magistrate—a person who holds authority and is responsible for ensuring fairness and equality in society. The magistrate is seen as a "guardian of justice," which means it's their job to uphold justice and, by extension, equality. If the magistrate is truly just, they don't use their position to take more than their fair share of the good things life offers (like wealth or power). In fact, whatever benefits the magistrate might receive should be proportional to what they truly deserve based on their merits, and their role is primarily about working for the benefit of others, not themselves. This idea ties into the concept Aristotle previously mentioned—that justice, by its nature, is about serving others rather than selfishly taking for oneself.
However, Aristotle recognizes that being just isn’t always an easy or selfless endeavor—it’s work. To honor the magistrate's fairness and effort, society rewards them with honor and privilege. These added benefits symbolize appreciation for their service to others. But Aristotle warns that some magistrates may not be satisfied with these intangible rewards. For those who crave more—like excessive power or resources—they run the risk of becoming tyrants. A tyrant is someone who prioritizes their own interests above justice and fairness, abusing their authority to serve themselves rather than the community.
In modern terms, Aristotle is drawing a clear line between leadership that serves the public good and leadership that becomes corrupt through selfishness.